Conformity -
a "change in a person's behavior or opinions as a result of real or
imagined pressure from a person or a group of people" (p.19, Aronson).
Conforming is acting at odds with one's beliefs or perceptions because others
are acting that way. (really compliance or identification)

Anti-conformity is
not the same thing as non-conformity. It is acting contrary to the desires and
expectations of others (norms) as a reaction to the others (e.g. parents).

What causes people to conform?

Asch
(1952) perceptual judgment of line lengths. Which of 3 lines is closest in
length to this line

In
this type of experiment the consequences of non-conformity are unclear - there
are no stated sanctions against non-conformity.

Variables that increase/decrease
conformity:

unanimity of
the group (regardless of its size)

group cohesiveness - when group
members are attracted to each other

commitment
to the initial judgment where there is no prior commitment ,
24.7% conformed with the erroneous majority but when Ss publicly committed
themselves to a judgment prior to hearing the erroneous judgment of the group
only 5.7% conformed. (Deutsch and Morton)

Self-aware people (private vs. public) when
people are privately self-aware they are less likely to conform; social
standards are more influential if the person is publicly self-aware

Self-presentation if one is
trying to present himself as intelligent, he will be perceived as more
intelligent if he does not conform (when the influence attempts are obvious to
the audience)

need
for individuation the desire to maintain one’s uniqueness

Desire for personal control - the
theory of psychological reactance - people will react against attempts
to control their behavioral freedom Burger (1987) desire for personal control
(high and low) and cartoon rating / High DPC Ss were less influenced by the
confederate’s ratings (although they were influenced compared to the control
condition of ratings made alone

makeup of group exerting the pressureexperts; members are important to the
individual; members are comparable to the individual; feelings of insecurity in
the relationship

information
(behavioral modeling) sometimes the behavior of others serves as a guide to
how we should behave. Aronson study - soaping up in the shower. With one
model, 49% conformed; with two models, 67% conformed.

Sherif
- the autokinetic effect - how far did the light move? First, S
made judgments alone; Second, they made judgments after hearing the judgments
of others. Findings: judgments were influenced by the other "judges".
With ambiguous stimuli, we conform to the behaviors and opinions of others.

Three types of responses to social influence:
compliance, identification, internalization:

Compliance
motivated by rewards and the avoidance of punishment. Lasts as long as the
rewards last or as long as the threat lasts. Going along with the group
behaviorally without being persuaded that the group is correct. Power is the
major component. (Brainwashing)People are more likely to comply when they are
in a good mood (prosocial or helping actions); ingratiation behaviors or
“buttering up” someone relies on this; reciprocity norm - I’ll do this, if you
will do this for me.

Identification -
desire to be like the influencer. We adopt an opinion or a behavior because it
puts us into a satisfying relationship with the influencer. The major component
of this type of conformity is the attractiveness of the influencer.

Internalization -
most permanent, most deeply rooted response to social influence. The desire to
be right is the motive. Once accepted the behavior or the opinion becomes a
part of our belief system separate from the source. Credibility of the
influencer is important (expert and trustworthy).

Obedience -
is an act of compliance to someone or a group or institution with power over
us. Although acts of compliance may be impermanent this does not mean they are
trivial. This is dramatically demonstrated in Jim Jones Mass Suicide and in
Milgram's research.

Milgram's
study - defined obedience as behaving according to the
demands of the authority figure.

approx.% administered
shocks to the end of the console. Only legitimate authority commanded high
obedience. Physical absence of the authority figure reduces obedience. The
farther the S is from the victim, the more willing they were to obey: see the
learner -%; hear only -%; had to put the learner's arm on the shock
plate -% (implications for war? -
desert storm fighter pilots?). In the Milgram experiment, the experimenter
persuaded the teacher that he had a moral obligation to continue.

The Ss said that they thought that they were really
shocking the "learner". They said that they felt conflict between
their inner motivation and the outer pressure.

People
explain the level of obedience as a result of the prestige of the Yale Lab
soMilgram conducted the same study in
Downtown New Haven and obtained nearly the same level of compliance.

Notice
that the switches on the shock console went from 15 -450 millevolts gradually .
Milgram wanted to measure obedience quantitatively. This arrangement allows the
"teacher" to get used to the shocking procedure. He becomes
desensitized to it as well as to the suffering of the "learner" and
he sees that no punishment occurs when he shocks the "learner"

Factors
affecting the degree of obedience:

proximity -
Milgram altered the visibility and the audibility of the "learner" .
The more immediate the victim, the less the obedience (esp. visual) The amount
of empathic cues contribute to this immediacy effect. He can imagine himself in
the same state. Harder to use the defense mechanism of denial. When the victim
is "in your face " it is hard to deny him

group pressure -
when confederates were putting pressure on to conform, conformity increased

Milgram's conclusion -
"the environment can legitimize and encourage behavior in normal
individuals that we would otherwise expect only from clear abnormals"

BrutalityZimbardo's Prison Simulation study

constructed a mock prison in the basement of the Stanford U.
psychology building. Two roles: prisoner/guard randomly designated. Prisoners
became passive/ guards frequently became brutal or allowed brutality. Guards
are entitled to use force/ degradation - once a person has been degraded, it is
easier to do anything you want to him/her (examples?)

lone
dissenter - devil's advocate - when the Catholic Church
determines whether someone is to be canonized a saint, it designated one of the
advocates to be a devil's advocate. The job of the devil's advocate is
to find reasons against canonization and to express these views to the other
advocates.The idea is that this
dissenter allows others who may have questions to voice his objections. The
dissenter gives other potential dissenters an ally. Asch showed in his
studies that just one other person who disagrees with the group decreased
conformity substantially. Milgram also found this to be true.

Minority
influence - Moscovici - Ss made judgments of color in front of the group;
minority confederates called a blue light "green". Question -what
impact does the minority have on the majority?The consistent minority affected the majority in two ways:

1) it
caused some of majority to change their overt response (direct effect);

2) it
affected a larger number of Ss by causing them to alter the way they looked at
the blue-green distinction (to broaden their conception of green) (latent
effect).The minority can cause the
majority to reconsider its views and look at the world in a different way (e.g.
the suffragettes)

Finding
a minority challenging the accepted view calls attention to the issue leading
the majority to notice things that it had not noticed before.

Maass
and Clark (1983) Ss were exposed to arguments for and against gay
rights. The arguments were presented as coming from either a majority or a
minority. Dependent variable - how much Ss agreed with the arguments in public
(compliance) or in private (internalization). Finding - the majority view
produced more compliance/ the minority led to more internalization.In a follow-up the authors looked at the
number of counterarguments produced in response to the arguments from the
majority/minority. Findings: more counterarguments were generated to majority
opinions. The more counteraguments produced the lower the private acceptance.
Majority exerts blunt pressure to conform (power) but stir up counteragruments
that reduce their impact.

Social Impact Theory (Latane)

the amount of influence a person
has in a social situation depends on:

1) number(as the number of people who agree increases
so does social impact - although it is not purely additive - as people increase
each person’s individual impact decreases)

2) strength
( status, expertise, power)

3) immediacy
(proximity - closeness in time and space

Bystander Intervention(Latane) and Altruism

Altruism
- benefiting others with no concern for oneself.
Psychoanalytic theory - man only works to reduce his inner tensions Behavioral
theories - we work to gain rewards or to avoid punishment/ so there is no
altruism

Latane
and Rodin "lady in distress"alone - 70% came to her aid; in pairs - 20%. The presence of
another bystander tends to inhibit action.

Darley
and Lataneepileptic
seizure - when the SA thought he was the only one listening to another person
go into seizure he was more likely to help than when he thought others were
also listening.

Diffusion
of responsibility

Defining
an emergency? How do you do it? Look to others? This may lead to
"pluralistic ignorance" a state in which a group misinterprets what
each other believes and uses this misbelief as the truth.

When
do we help?

Are
there group circumstances in which we help? Commonfate or mutually may be
engenderedamong people who have the
same needs or interests, same environmental conditions, etc.No escape from face-to-face situations;

PiliavinNYC subway collapse victim/ people
spontaneously rushed to his aid; if perceived him as ill -95% intervened; if
perceived him as drunk - 50%

Prerequisites
for helping:

1)
defining the situation as an emergency;2) assuming personal responsibility for helping